Fortis Healthcare has moved the Supreme Court challenging the Delhi High Court’s August 31, 2026 judgment directing a forensic audit into the evolution and diminution of its shareholding held by former promoters Malvinder Mohan Singh and Shivinder Mohan Singh, as well as related transactions involving lenders and IHH Healthcare’s acquisition of a controlling stake in the hospital chain.
In a regulatory disclosure on September 16, Fortis said it has filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court against the August 31 judgment.
“The Company has filed a Special Leave Petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the order dated August 31, 2026, passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case titled “Daiichi Sankyo Company, Limited vs. Malvinder Mohan Singh And Ors.” (O.M.P.(EFA)(COMM.) 6/2016), specifically, in relation to the following applications –EX.APPL.(OS) 3764/2022, EX.APPL.(OS) 1615/2025, and EX.APPL.(OS) 3763/2022 (the “Order”),” Fortis noted in the filing.
The Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Subramonium Prasad, had allowed all three applications and appointed S Ramanand Aiyar & Co., Chartered Accountants, as the forensic auditor. The court said the purpose of the audit was to identify and reconstruct the chain of events to enable it to identify the persons and companies involved in the dissipation of shares.
The dispute arises from a Singapore arbitration award dated April 29, 2016, under which the judgment debtors were directed to pay Daiichi Sankyo INR 2,562 crore, with pre-award interest of 4.44% and post-award interest of 5.33%. The Delhi High Court recorded Daiichi’s position that approximately INR 5,300 crore was due under the decree. The challenge to the award was rejected by the Delhi High Court on January 31, 2018, and the Supreme Court affirmed that order on February 16, 2018.
The forensic audit was ordered after the High Court examined the alleged depletion of assets that had been represented as being available towards satisfaction of the award.
The court noted that the shareholding held through various entities had undergone substantial changes through invocation of pledges, creation of additional security, contractual top-up mechanisms, sale of pledged shares, the IHH-Northern TK Venture transaction and other on-market and off-market transactions.
The court said the audit would reconstruct the chronology of relevant transactions and trace the movement of shares and corresponding funds. It would also examine the nature of the transactions, approvals obtained, and the entities and individuals involved in the decision-making process.
The audit covers the evolution of the shareholding of Fortis Healthcare Holding Private Limited (FHHPL) in Fortis Healthcare Limited after May 24, 2016, including the movement of encumbered and unencumbered shares, creation and invocation of pledges, top-up mechanisms, transfers and sale of pledged shares.
The auditor has also been directed to prepare a transaction-wise chronology of dealings in Fortis shares, examine transactions undertaken after various orders of the Delhi High Court and Supreme Court, and examine the role of Fortis, its officers, directors, key managerial personnel, company secretary, compliance officer, registrar and transfer agent, depositories and other intermediaries.
The court further directed the auditor to examine the role of banks, including loan facilities secured by Fortis shares, creation and variation of security, maintenance of security margins, top-up obligations, invocation and sale of pledged shares and release of security.
A separate part of the audit will examine the acquisition of the controlling stake in Fortis by IHH Healthcare Berhad through Northern TK Venture Pte. Ltd., including approvals, regulatory filings, flow of consideration, the role of concerned parties and intermediaries, and consequential transactions affecting FHHPL’s shareholding in Fortis.
The High Court also directed examination of downstream entities owned or controlled by the judgment debtors that received the benefit of loans secured by Fortis shares, including the purpose for which such borrowings were availed and utilised after the decree. The auditor has been directed to examine books of account, bank and demat statements, board and committee minutes, statutory registers, internal correspondence, emails, legal opinions, compliance records, depository instructions, SEBI and stock exchange filings and other relevant records.
The court had initially noted that Daiichi’s application sought an audit concerning 17 banks and financial institutions. During arguments, Daiichi restricted its prayer to three banks and subsequently stated that it did not seek a forensic audit of any bank, focusing instead on Fortis and the judgment debtors.
The High Court nevertheless held that a forensic audit should cover all banks and financial institutions involved, observing that its power to order such an audit was not dependent on the decree holder maintaining its original request.
The court directed the concerned downstream entities, banks and Fortis to assist the forensic auditor. The auditor is required to issue its initial requisition list within four weeks, while the concerned entities have two weeks from receipt to furnish the requested information. Failure to comply with requisitions may be treated as contempt of the court’s orders.
The audit is to be completed within six months from receipt of the order, with its fees to be borne by Daiichi Sankyo as the decree holder. The High Court has listed the matter for April 1, 2027.
Fortis’ latest filing, however, does not disclose any quantified financial impact arising from the Delhi High Court order.
